Aligning Second Language Learning and Computer-Assisted Language Learning: Networking the Language Class, Tandem Learning and

e-movies
Satomi Kawaguchi, University of Western Sydney, NSW, Australia Bruno Di Biase, University of Western Sydney, NSW, Australia
Abstract: Computer-assisted language learning (CALL) is fast becoming a normal part of second language (L2) learning both inside and outside classroom thanks to advancements in communication technology. However, technological availability, rather than pedagogical objectives, tends to dictate the choice of CALL activities (Miyamoto 2001) in L2 learning. This paper presents three multimedial activities introduced as part of a blended learning project in Japanese L2 and other languages at the University of Western Sydney, aiming to align second language learning and CALL as well as gauging learner satisfaction. These are: (a) social networking using BEBO, (b) tandem learning using MSN and (c) a short e-movie production. We will show how we align pedagogical goal and CALL activities (Levy 2007). We also show that CALLs capabilities may, for instance, be used to enhance language input and learner output both of which are crucial for language acquisition (c.f., Krashen 1985, Long 1996, Swain 1985). CALL can be used for real-time interaction, production and feedback. Further, using an analysis of language produced in tandem learning activities based on Processability Theory (PT, Pienemann 1998, Pienemann, Di Biase & Kawaguchi 2005) we address the question does CALL activity promote language learning?. Results suggest that there are vast individual differences in students learning outcomes. This justifies close monitoring to promote overall linguistic development e.g. by using a reliable developmental measure such as PT. Keywords: Aligning CALL and L2 Learning Objectives, CALL, Second Language Learning, Social Networks, Tandem Learning, Processability Theory

NTHUSIASM FOR TECHNOLOGICAL innovation in language learning may blur the primary aim of language learning itself (both the process and product) and minimize or ignore the alignment of technological tools with language learning objectives. Traditional approaches to language teaching, on the other hand, tend to be skeptical about, hence avoid, the use of innovations altogether, thus missing out on the considerable advantages offered by available communication technologies. How to avoid the two extremes? Further, evaluations of the use and effects of technology tend to emphasize student satisfaction tending to gloss over, again, language learning objectives. In reporting on the implementation of blended learning in an intermediate Japanese L2 class at the University of Western Sydney (UWS) this paper argues for the importance of aligning second language learning objectives and Computer Assisted Language Learning (Levy & Stockwell, 2006). At the same time we argue for gauging not only learner satisfaction but also language learning itself. So, we will illustrate a range of multimedia on-line activities and show how they can be aligned with language learning objectives and thus enhance their potential to support second language acquisition. We will then show (a) evaluations of students percepThe International Journal of Learning Volume 16, Number 10, 2009, http://www.Learning-Journal.com, ISSN 1447-9494
Common Ground, Satomi Kawaguchi, Bruno Di Biase, All Rights Reserved, Permissions: cg-support@commongroundpublishing.com

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING

tion and satisfaction on blended learning experiences and (b) how to measure language development through one on-line activity, i.e., tandem learning.

Second Language Acquisition and CALL

The use of computer technologies in second language classrooms is moving towards normalisation (Chambers & Bax, 2006). Computer assisted language learning (CALL) in second language education enhances language input, language output and learner interaction, all of which are crucial for language acquisition (cf. Krashen, 1985; Long, 1996; Swain, 1985). Also, CALL can promote learners motivation (Levy & Stockwell, 2006), autonomy (Lewis, 2005) and collaboration (Finkbeiner, 2001). In line with the Levelt (1989) Speech Processing Model, Payne & Whitney (2002) propose that synchronous, computer-mediated communication using chat may achieve better outcomes than face-to-face activities because the language processing of the former, though similar, is slower. Therefore, CALL may be expected to promote success in language learning while making the learning experience more enjoyable and closer to learners time management needs and technological preferences. However, when it comes to classroom situation, many educators are skeptical about the effectiveness of computer-based activity for language learning particularly given the importance of real-time interaction, oral production, and immediacy of feedback. CALL can also be seen as a way to reduce face-to-face teaching time as well as cost. Yet, blended learning1 has many advantages. In fact, blended learning can achieve even better outcomes than exclusively face-to-face learning, as we will attempt to show.

Structure of the Unit of Study Language Skills 203: Listening and Speaking
Blended learning was recently introduced to languages units at UWS, Australia. Here, we will focus on an intermediate level language unit of study called Language Skills 203: listening and speaking which is an umbrella unit involving the five languages currently taught, namely Arabic, Chinese, Italian, Japanese and Spanish, through a one hour lecture in English (on how to develop skills and achieve success in L2 learning) and a two and a half hour language-specific, face-to-face, tutorial. The subject aims to promote listening and speaking skills based on grammatical knowledge gained previously. Multimedia used in this class was: (a) Bebo social networking; (b) tandem language learning through instant text messaging; and (c) an e-movie project. These were utilised generally as out-of-class activities aiming at consolidating the learning objectives (both grammatical and situational) covered in the face-to-face session each week. We will now illustrate these language activities and show how we align activities and learning objectives. The Japanese L2 class, which used the full range of media, will provide the focus for this illustration.

Bebo Social Networking (http://www.bebo.com/)

Bebo is a friendly website for children and adults of all ages. Though mostly used for comment and chat among friends, it can also be utilized for studies. There are many social net1

According to the New South Wales Department of Education Blended Learning is learning which combines online and face-to-face approaches.

288

SATOMI KAWAGUCHI, BRUNO DI BIASE

working systems such as Facebook, Myspace, LinkedIn, to name just a few. However, Bebo was selected because of its variety of functions and capacity to handle non-alphabetic characters. Bebo can handle Arabic, Chinese and Japanese texts without any difficulties or text encoding, so it was chosen because the subject taught (Languages Skills 203) comprised 5 languages, as explained earlier, with between 15 and 25 students each. Short video clips and picture slide shows can be easily uploaded on the Bebo site, which is also relatively protected from mass advertising intrusion. This is a crucial factor in choosing a social networking system in educational contexts. We created one Bebo site per language tutorial exclusively within the group. In order to illustrate Bebo as a L2 learning tool, part of the Japanese pages are shown as examples in (1), (2) and (3). The screen in (1) is the tutors home page where a photo and self introduction in Japanese are uploaded. Every student in a group has his/her own homepage linked to everybody elses. Thus every student can view the homepage of the tutor and his/her colleagues, send comments, and participate in quiz or opinion polls created by others. The screen in (2) shows some video clips which the tutor uploaded as a weekly listening quiz. Students also uploaded their own video clips as part of required tasks. The screen in (3) shows the results of one student-generated opinion poll. The table in (4) summarises activities using various Bebo functions paired up with all four language skills speaking, listening, writing and reading as well as real time communication skills using on-line text chat and cultural activities such as the creation of culture-oriented quizzes.

(1) Screenshot of Bebo Homepage Showing User Profile

289

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING

(2) Screenshot of Video Clip (With Listening Quiz) on Bebo

(3) A Student-generated Opinion Poll: Which Food Do You Like Best, German, Italian or French?

290

SATOMI KAWAGUCHI, BRUNO DI BIASE

(4) Bebo Activities and Language Skills Summary Language skills Writing Reading Speaking Listening Examples of activities using Bebo Blog Comments; reading friends sites Creation of video clips Listening quizzes; Youtube clips

Communicating through text On-line chat; comments exchange and collaboration Cultural understanding Language awareness Creation of cultural quizzes Friendly peer language corrections

Next, we show how we align teaching objectives with on-line activities. Recall that Bebo was used as weekly homework to reinforce teaching objectives introduced in the in-class lesson. The table in (5) below displays examples of weekly teaching objectives aligned with on-line activities. (5) Aligning Teaching Objectives with On-line Activities Using Bebo (Excerpt) Week in the Topic of In-class Lesson and Semester Learning Objectives 4 Talk about yourself, your family and friends Adjective inflection forms Japanese word processing Show & Tell: describe items of sentimental value to you. Noun modification, adjective connections. Vocabulary of shapes, colours, patterns, etc. Best 3 in my class Distinguish better than~ and best among ~. Weekly Online Homework (to be Done in Japanese) Set up your Bebo site Upload your personal profile. Describe yourself using various adjectives. Invite all your classmates as friends Upload a video clip on your show & tell. Listening comprehension quizzes based on the tutors show & tell video clip.

Upload opinion poll. Ask three questions and write the result of your opinion poll (best and better) on your blog site.

10

Job interview: expressing your abil- Blog what do you want to become in ities the future? Support your plan with an Potential form, permission and indication of your abilities must

291

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING

11

Express your opinion Friendly peer corrections of your I think~, it may be ~, you should classmates grammatical errors on their ~ Bebo site (send comments to two classmates). Upload quiz related to Japanese people, language, culture, society, history, etc.

In Week 4, the topic of the lesson is talking about yourself, your family and friends with a grammatical focus on adjective inflections. Also, word processing using Japanese characters is introduced. Bebo homework for this week is to set up the students Bebo site and upload a personal profile (about yourself, your pet, family and friends) using various adjectives. For example, a student wrote: (verbatim) (I am short and my hair and eyes are brown. I think I am gentle and cheerful but sometimes I am quiet and cool). To do this task the student used various adjectives involving polite and connective forms. In Week 5, the topic of the lesson was show and tell: describing belongings of sentimental value to you. The grammatical focus was noun sentential modification with vocabulary of shapes, colours, patterns and other variables. Bebo homework this week was to listen to a teachers video clip on show and tell on Russian dolls, where she explained why she had a sentimental attachment to them. The teachers video clip was used as comprehension practice for the students, who were then required to upload a short video clip about their own show & tell this week. Examples of show & tell are a dog given by a girl friend and a soft toy grandmother made. One student showed a single-lens reflex camera and some photos in her video clip. Then she offered some information about them. She explained: (verbatim) (I bought this camera five years ago when I went back to Hong Kong. I could carry this camera with me everywhere and taking photos was fun. Here are three photos which are photos I took when I was a high school student.) Thus this student successfully and purposefully used various noun modifications. The table in (5) also lists Week 6, 10 and 11 activities where creation of opinion polls, blogging, and friendly peer language corrections were selected as homework. From these examples, we can see that teaching objectives are aligned with on-line Bebo activities each week. Data from students work above clearly show that such activities significantly help achieve the weeks teaching objectives. We also used Bebo to promote cultural awareness and understanding. One such Bebo activity was the creation of cultural quizzes; an example taken from one students site is shown in (6) (English translations have been added in brackets). By both creating and answering cultural quizzes, all students in the group benefit from, and promote, cultural understanding in a fun way.

292

SATOMI KAWAGUCHI, BRUNO DI BIASE

(6) (What is Tanabata?) 1. 2. 3. 4. (A letter writing your wish) (A special item of clothing) (The festival of the stars.) (A fireworks festival)

There are a number of advantages and great potential in using social network platforms in L2 teaching and learning. First, it increases motivation in students by using technologies closer to the students lifestyle (i.e., time- and location-independent design). Second, it increases students opportunity for guided, autonomous self-study. Third, it maximizes students input (both in reading and listening) and output (speaking and writing) outside face-to-face classes. Furthermore, it promotes collaboration among students and it provides authentic contexts (such as opinion polls, self descriptions) while engaging students innovative, creative and/or artistic ability.

Tandem Language Learning Via Instant Messaging

Another multimedial instrument, instant text messaging through the popular MSN, was used for tandem language learning.2 25 intermediate Japanese L2 students at UWS and 23 first year English L2 students at Kanda University of International Studies (KUIS), Japan, participated in tandem learning. Tandem pairs were matched based on mutual interests. Students engaged in three one-hour chat sessions (30 minutes in English and 30 minutes in Japanese at each session) over a semester. Thus each student plays the role of language tutor using his/her native language as well as the role of a language learner when using the other language. The first session, organized within class time, introduced students to MSN Messenger and had them find out about each other. The second session had students find out about their partners university life while for the third session students found out about their partners culture and/or controversial current issues. Students were required to organize two chat session times to submit reflections and transcripts after each session. Students were also asked to send their partner some language corrections and suggestions after each chat. According to Schweinhorst (2003), tandem learning promotes bilingualism, reciprocity and learner autonomy. Other benefits include: fostering intercultural competence (Woodlin, 2003), language coaching and modeling (Brammerts & Calvert, 2003), motivation through autonomy and fostering integrative motivation as well as cooperative learning and language awareness (Finkbeiner, 2001). Payne and Whitney (2002) demonstrate that on-line chat can, indirectly, improve L2 oral proficiency. Chat can lead to greater learner noticing of problematic L2 language than in face-to-face communication (Lai & Zhao, 2006). Our students language development through tandem learning is presented below.

In tandem learning a group of students learning a second language engages in a learning interaction with another group of students who are native speakers of the language. These, in turn, are also learners of a second language which is the native language of the first group. So, each group is, alternatively, learning from, or teaching the other group. In our case the groups were learners of Japanese L2 in an Australian university, and learners of English L2 in a Japanese university.

293

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING

E-movie Project
The third multimedia activity used in this unit is a group-prepared e-movie. Typically, between four and six students formed a group to do this task. The tasks undertaken for this project are: 1. 2. 3. Outline the story and its cultural relevance Write a script in Japanese Make a video using Windows Movie Maker or any similar program

As a first step the students conduct an investigation of the culture they are learning about, then choose a topic/situation, construct conversation using appropriate speech levels and finally, collaboratively, make a 10- to 15-minute e-movie with a theme/story behind it. Component A and B above should be submitted halfway through the semester so that students receive feedback in time (from peers and the tutor) and have an opportunity to improve the story/script. Students are encouraged to use their own L2 grammatical structures and expressions learned in the tutorials as much as possible. Video shooting and editing were independently organised by the students. Unsurprisingly, none of the students reported technical problems or sought technical help from the teaching staff. The movie viewing session was organised in the last tutorial of the semester. Among the e-movie topics used by the students there were childrens folk stories in which cultural values and historical background are integrated. One group, after investigating childrens stories, created an e-movie titled Momotaroo, about a peach boy who was found in a large peach as a baby by an old childless couple and was raised as their child. Peach Boy fought against devils who lived in Onigashima (the isle of devils) located to the north of Japan with some help from Japanese native animals such as a dog, a pheasant and a monkey. The devils were defeated by them. Peach Boy brought back lots of treasures retrieved from the devils and returned them to the people, who lived happily ever after. The devils and the treasure in this story respectively symbolize feudal authority in Japan and tax (such as rice) unreasonably confiscated by the authorities. Another e-movie was High School Graffiti. It is a story of a teenage boy who moved to a new high school somewhere in Japan. The story takes up a serious social problem both in Japan and in Australia: bullying. The story tells how and why this boy was bullied by new classmates, how the problem was ignored by his teacher, and how he overcame the problem. The story also captures how he developed new friendships at the high school. The group which created this e-movie conducted a thorough investigation of Japanese high school and teenage student culture. What is particularly worth noticing about our students movie scripts was the many colloquial and fixed expressions which they managed to incorporate, which, on reflection, they would have had little opportunity to learn or practice in exclusively face-to-face tutorial settings. Laufer & Hulstijn (2001) propose three major factors affecting learning and retention of new L2 words: (a) degree of need; (b) degree of search; and (c) degree of evaluation. Regarding degree of need, it is mild when the task is introduced by the teacher, while it is strong when the needs are created by the learners themselves. Degree of search becomes stronger when the student checks a word in the dictionary or asks for the meaning of the L2 word from the teacher/native speaker (rather than the word and its meaning being

294

SATOMI KAWAGUCHI, BRUNO DI BIASE

just given unrequested by the teacher or listed in a textbook). Degree of evaluation is higher when the student has an opportunity to compare the meaning of a L2 word with other words such as synonyms and finds out the best word according to the context. L2 words are best remembered and retained when the involvement load of the above three factors is higher. As can be appreciated, writing an e-movie script requires high involvement load on all three factors as it is designed to maximise students learning outcomes and retention of L2 words and expressions.

Evaluation of Blended Learning

According to Miyamoto (2001), introduction of multimedia in L2 teaching and learning should be evaluated from multiple aspects. One aspect concerns learners perceptions, such as learner characteristics (motivation and computer orientation), usability of on-line tasks and learner satisfaction. Evaluation on this aspect is even more important for on-line activities than face-to-face activities as the former largely rely on the learners autonomous learning: if the evaluation by the students on this aspect is low, they simply are not engaging in these on-line activities. Another aspect is students linguistic development. This aspect is equally important. L2 learning through multimedia may be fun and appealing to young students, but if the linguistic outcome is poor we cannot evaluate the on-line activities as successful L2 learning and teaching tools. Beyond these, we propose that further aspects to be evaluated include development of cultural awareness and communication skills. As a first step in evaluating our blended learning project, we investigated learner perception through questionnaire and language development by analyzing transcripts of tandem language production over the semester.

Students Perceptions
A questionnaire on blended learning experience was administered in Week 10 (towards the end of the semester). The questionnaire consists of both Likert scale and open questions. The graphs in (7) to (9) show results of Likert scaling questions on students perception of CALL, their preferred learning mode (i.e., face-to-face, on-line, or blended learning) and satisfaction level respectively. The scaling range is: 1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=neutral, 4=agree, 5=strongly agree. Students perceptions are deemed positive if the average score is higher than (neutral) 3 and negative if it is lower than 3. Then (10) presents a selection of open comments.

295

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING

(7) Perception of CALL Q1 I like using computers for study Q2 I prefer to study without computers Q3 On-line activities helped me learn at my own pace Q4 Using the computer helped me learn the language more effectively

(8) Preference on Learning Mode: Face-to-face, On-line, or Blended Learning? Q1 I prefer the on-line activities Q2 I prefer face-to-face language learning activities Q3 I think computers should replace face-to-face teaching Q4 I prefer a mix of face-to-face and on-line language learning activities

296

SATOMI KAWAGUCHI, BRUNO DI BIASE

(9) Satisfaction Level Q1 I find the on-line activities easy to do Q2 I find the on-line activities very useful Q3 I find the on-line activities motivating Q4 At this moment I am very enthusiastic about learning this language Q5 At this moment I am satisfied with my study (10) Some Typical Open-question Answers (Verbatim) on Face-to-face/Blended Learning liked best least Liked best Time and space management You could practice what you had learnt at your own pace and as many times as you liked, as well as being able to listen to words or dialogues. The ability to practice in my own time. It was interactive so therefore more stimulating and motivating. It combined many components from understanding to pronunciation, reading, and writing. Personally i would prefer face to face classes, but i did enjoy how convenient it was when it came to time Liked least Feedback and corrections Very difficult to receive feedback and corrections, and understand it. Not being able to ask for help from your teacher or friends. Technical issues Too much time, and due to other studies found it difficult to access the on-line component all the time Can be difficult when stuck on an activity Others It takes time to do

297

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING

It can be time-consuming, leaving less time Technical issues That its endless and you choose how far you for study Nothing want to delve into it. They are always there to look back on. Motivation I agreed with teachers use of technology in encouraging L2 acquisition. It was fun, interactive & offered class members the opportunity to get to know each other beyond class environ. It was fun, and it was a way of speaking to classmates. This non face-to-face way of communication reduces the need for confidence, and also gives you a little more time to think about your response, or search for new necessary vocabulary. Others Enjoyed learning colloquial Japanese, especially slang, which cannot be found in the textbook. and wanted to learn more The Bebo site was a fun Kills time when bored, and can practice whenever. The students evaluation can be summarized this way. First, regarding students perception of CALL, intermediate Japanese students like using the computer for study; they believe on-line activities help them study more effectively and, crucially, at their own pace. As for learning mode preference, our students found both on-line and face-to-face components useful. However, they do not want the computer to replace face-to-face. Their preferred learning mode is, unequivocally, blended learning. Students rating regarding satisfaction level indicates that intermediate students found on-line activities easy to do and useful and they are relatively satisfied with their study. It is worthwhile noting that obligatory UWSwide teaching evaluation administered at the end of semester revealed that, compared to other units taught at UWS, our students rated their satisfaction level with this unit significantly higher than the UWS mean in all question items. The question asking whether their interest in learning increased as a consequence of this class was rated highly positively.

Language Development
Even where satisfaction levels are high we must still ask whether (and measure what) students have actually learnt. To do this, five students3 text messages in the three tandem sessions over the semester were analysed in terms of lexical and syntactic development. Lexical
3

These five students were selected for focused analysis because they completed all tandem sessions, with the same pair student, exchanged e-mails to give feedback to their pair, thus we can more coherently and consistently trace their language development and metalinguistic awareness.

298

SATOMI KAWAGUCHI, BRUNO DI BIASE

learning is a key component of language learning (Nation, 2001). Also, syntax is lexically driven (Bresnan, 2001) and L2 learners syntactic structure is a crucial indicator of their current level of language acquisition (Pienemann, 1998; Pienemann, Di Biase & Kawaguchi, 2005) evaluated through language-specific developmental measurements (cf. Kawaguchi, 2005 for Japanese L2).

(11)

(12) Here we show the results of the five students, Clarence, Jan, Dani, Lee and Charlie, who participated in all three tandem sessions with the same tandem partner and completed all required tasks. Lexical analysis shows, in (11), the number of words produced per session and, in (12), the cumulative word-types produced per session. All five learners increased the number of tokens in the second session compared to the first session, but some of them decreased in number in the third session. We believe that text exchanging slowed down in speed due to task difficulty in the third session (i.e., cultural and controversial issues). On the other hand, (11) shows that all five learners uniformly increased cumulative word type with each session. This indicates that all learners used a number of new vocabulary items in each session. Assignment of conversation topics for each session might have had a positive effect in encouraging students to use a range of vocabulary items. However, in spite of lexical growth, significant individual differences are found in these students in the production of types and tokens in each session. Comparing Clarence and Charlie, whose lexical produc-

299

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING

tion were the smallest and the largest respectively among the five students, the difference in both number of tokens and types produced is, remarkably, over 1:5. (13) Japanese L2 Learners Sentence Patterns Session 1 Clarence Dani Canonical Canonical Session 2 Canonical Session 3 Canonical

Canonical, Adverbial Canonical clause (conditional: -ba Adverbial clause (-toki when) and tara if) Passive sentential modification for noun Canonical Sentential modification for object noun Complement clause (-to omoimasu I think that) Conditional (-tara if) Benefactive Canonical Adverbial clause (-kara because) Sentential modification for noun Adverbial clause (- toki when) Conditional (-tara if) OBJ topicalisation

Charlie

Canonical Adverbial clauses (-kara because) Complement clauses (-to omoimasu I think that)

Similar results are obtained with the analysis of sentence patterns produced by the same five Japanese L2 learners. Here we selected three students whose lexical productions are the lowest (Clarence), the middle (Dani) and the highest (Charlie), as (13) shows. Clarence produced canonical sentences only, which is Subject-Object-Verb order in Japanese, from Session 1 to Session 3. No other sentence patterns were produced by him. Dani, on the other hand, showed dramatic progress. He also produced canonical sentences only in Session 1, just like Clarence. However, by Session 2 he produced adverbial clauses and by Session 3 passive and sentential modification of the noun. Charlie was already able to produce such sentence patterns as adverbial and complement clauses in Session 1. Yet he too produced new structures in each session: conditional and benefactive in Session 2; sentential modification of noun and object topicalisation in Session 3. Again, we found large individual differences in terms of grammatical development. In summary, two learners (Dani and Charlie) expanded their sentence structures from one session to the next. However, one student (Clarence) did not develop his Japanese L2 syntax as he continued to produce only canonical sentences through to the end of the semester. Further, Clarence produced far fewer text messages compared to other students. This justifies close monitoring of the students by the teacher when using on-line activities.

Conclusion
While reporting on the introduction of blended learning in an intermediate L2 Japanese class in Australia this paper demonstrates that socio-pedagogical and motivational objectives

300

SATOMI KAWAGUCHI, BRUNO DI BIASE

pursued through the introduction of new communication technologies should, crucially, be aligned with linguistic objectives because CALL by itself may be insufficient in promoting language development. CALL is shown to have the capacity to support the input hypothesis (Krashen, 1985; Long, 1996) as well as the Output (Swain, 1985) and the interaction (Gass & Mackey, 2007) hypotheses. Motivation appears to be enhanced by the autonomous learning afforded by the new technologies. All three CALL activities introduced allow the less confident, less proficient and shy students to interact, possibly more so than face-to-face interaction, and perhaps achieve better outcomes and greater benefits. However, CALL is not free from problems. Analysis of text production reveals enormous individual differences in lexical and syntactic development. Results from one student show only small progress with lexical learning and no development of syntax over the semester. This suggests that the language teacher using CALL should monitor students performance using reliable measures. Future research should also capture changes in students goals and motivations over the course of their study (Levy & Stockwell, 2006) as well as changes in cultural and linguistic awareness. We also show here that CALL is not simply a replacement of face-to-face as some teachers seem to believe, but it offers far greater opportunities than the traditional language classroom for self-paced language production and comprehension. In face-to-face interaction many language students are disadvantaged by having to comprehend and produce immediately (i.e., in a time-constrained mode) in the language they are learning. Technology allows asynchronous interaction, which gives students time to perceive, construct and produce their message at their own pace. Paradoxically, many of these activities could not be entertained face-to-face.

Acknowledgemnts
The Authors wish to thank the UWS Learning and Teaching Action Plan (LTAP) and the School of Humanities and Languages for supporting the Blended Learning project on which this paper is based.

References
Brammerts, H. & Calvert, M. (2003). Learning by communicating in tandem. In T. Lewis & L. Walker (Eds), Autonomous language learning in tandem. Sheffield: Academy Electronic Publications, 45-60. Bresnan, J. (2001). Lexical-functional syntax. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers. Chambers, A., & Bax, S. (2006). Making CALL work: Towards normalization. System, 34, 465-479. Finkbeiner, C. (2001). One and all in CALL? Learner-moderator-researcher. Computer Assisted Language Learning. 14(3-4), 339-361. Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A. (2007). Input, interaction, and output in second language acquisition. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds), Theories in Second Language Acquisition (pp. 175-200). London: LEA. Kawaguchi, S. (2005). Processability theory and Japanese as a second language. Journal of Acquisition of Japanese as a Second Language, 8, 83-114. Krashen, S. (1985). The Input Hypothesis: issues and implications. New York: Longman. Lai, C. & Zhao, Y. (2006). Noticing and text-based chat. Language Learning & Technology , 10(3), 102-120. Laufer, B. & Hulstijn, J. (2001). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in second language : The construct of task-induced involvement. Applied Linguistics , 22(1), 1-26.

301

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING

Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Levy, M. & Stockwell, G. (2006). CALL dimensions: Options and issues in computer-assisted language learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Lewis, T. (2005). The effective learning of languages in tandem. In J. A. Coleman & J. Klapper (Eds), Effective learning and teaching in modern languages (pp. 165-172). London: Routledge. Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Miyamoto, S. (2001). ( Development and evaluation of multimedia language learning resources: theory and practice). Tokyo: Keisuisha. Nation, P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Payne, J. S. & Whitney, P. J. (2002). Developing L2 oral proficiency through synchronous CMC: Output, working memory, and interlanguage development. CALICO Journal , 20(1), 7-32. Pienemann, M. (1998). Language Processing and Second Language Development: Processability Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Pienemann, M., Di Biase, B., and Kawaguchi, S. (2005). Extending Processability theory. In M. Pienemann (Ed.), Cross-linguistic aspects of Processability Theory (pp. 199-252). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Schweinhorst, K. (2003). Learner autonomy and tandem language learning: Putting principles into practice in synchronous and asychronous telecommunications environments. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 16(5), 427-443. Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. M. Gass & C. G. Madden (Eds), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235-253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Woodlin, J. (2003). Encouraging intercultural competence in tandem learning. In T. Lewis & L. Walker (Eds), Autonomous language learning in tandem. Sheffield: Academy Electronic Publications, 131-143. ]

About the Authors

Dr. Satomi Kawaguchi Satomi Kawaguchi teaches Japanese and second language acquisition at the University of Western Sydney. She is also the coordinator of Honours Program in Languages and Linguistics. She has published many articles on Processability Theory and language learning, particularly Japanese L2. She is interested in developing theory-practice connections in language learning. Dr. Bruno Di Biase Bruno Di Biase is the Acting Head, School of Humanities and Languages, University of Western Sydney. He teaches undergraduate and postgraduate courses in Second Language Acquisition as well as Grammatical concepts and Italian L2. His research interests and publications focus on language learning and theory construction in Processability Theory.

302

Copyright of International Journal of Learning is the property of Common Ground Publishing and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.